My Big Coin, the platform accused of fraud by the CFTC, has requested a nearly seven-month extension on their case to sufficiently answer questions raised by the commission.
September saw the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) given the green light to pursue their case against My Big Coin (MBC). The commission charged the platform in January this year and alleged that the platform swindled investors out of approximately $6 million since 2014.
According to FinanceFeeds, MBC’s owner, Randall Crater, and his co-defendants reportedly touted the currency as being tradeable and being backed by gold. In order to make it seem more legitimate, the platform also said that it would assist in the stabilization of 22 countries, including Venezuela.
Since January, the platform has been insisting that the CFTC has no jurisdiction over the case as MBC is not a commodity. A Massachusetts District Court judge disagreed with MBC and allowed the commission to proceed with their case.
This in itself shows that there is perhaps less confusion surrounding who should be policing virtual currencies, at least when it comes to scams and crypto fraud in the U.S. The decision was based on the fact that Bitcoin and MBC are both virtual currencies and because the CFTC has oversight over the former, the same should, therefore, be applied to the latter. The judge responsible for the ruling, Rya Zobel, explained:
That is sufficient, especially at the pleading stage, for plaintiff to allege that My Big Coin is a ‘commodity’ under the Act.
However, the next bump in the road is a recent motion filed by the defendants requesting more time to respond to the CFTC’s complaints against them. How long? A month? Maybe two? The answer is seven with the 3rd of June 2019 given as the requested date. The motion states that:
[The CFTC] has served voluminous written discovery requests to the defendants ranging from interrogatories, requests for production of documents, and requests for admissions, and additional time is needed to sort out the requests, communicate with the various defendants to properly respond while avoiding duplication of the tens of thousands of documents produced in the investigation.
In addition, it is alleged that:
Randall Crater has serious pre-existing health conditions that have impeded his ability to render timely assistance to legal counsel.
The defendants’ legal counsel is, of course, skeptical of the claims made by the CFTC and are apparently eager to disprove them.
Do you think that the defendants will be found guilty? Is the CFTC the right authority to deal with crypto fraud? Let us know in the comments below!
Images courtesy of Shutterstock.